Jump to content
Game-Labs Forum

Feedback (UPDATED: 11/9/2015)


Nick Thomadis

Recommended Posts

One of the fundamental problems with artillery in UGG is if you make artillery too effective then the CSA infantry needs to be beefed up to unrealistically to compensate for the preponderance of Federal artillery batteries.  

 

The net effect is the Union infantry is too wimpy vs. the CSA infantry.  

 

Overly powerful artillery destroys the game balance and the relationships that existed during the ACW.  

 

The goal of the game is to make it possible for either side to win in the various scenarios.  Some scenarios may be more or less difficult to win; but it should not be impossible to win or why play?

 

Thoughts regarding artillery:

 

On the battlefield there were two classes of artillery. The first was artillery that was supported by infantry or dismounted cavalry.  The second was artillery without support.

 

The former class was difficult to dislodge and had a significant impact on the moral of enemy ordered to attack a line of combined arms on the defensive.

 

The latter class was a target that could be overrun with minimal casualties.  Artillery batteries simply could not stand alone and unsupported.  

 

Even a line of guns could be taken unless the attackers moral was close to being shattered at the time they encountered an unsupported line of artillery.  See: Missionary Ridge at Chattanooga for example.

 

Gettysburg is also a prime example.  Seven individual batteries deployed as isolated batteries were overrun with minimal casualties to the attackers.  Tactically these guns were taken by men in skirmish order; the standard method for dealing with an unsupported battery.  Skirmish order kept attacking targets minimized for artillery rapidly destroyed the mobility of a battery.  

 

While UGG can't deploy skirmishers it should be able to abstract this key distinction with modified based on the operational radius of the battery.

 

Here are some practical observations...

 

Bigelow, Smith, and 5 other batteries operating in isolation were overrun.  

 

Longstreet's charge on July 2 was stopped by a line of guns deployed effectively as a 'Grand Battery' of multiple batteries brought together in a line and holding a final position until infantry support could arrive.

 

Longstreet's charge on July 3 (aka Pickett's Charge) was broken by a combined arms line.

 

From an implementation standpoint it is almost like the artillery should have a support radius similar to the Corps commanders at 'canister range'.  When friendly infantry/cavalry are close the batteries are more effective and lethal against the enemy.  When batteries are not supported, meaning no friendly units are within the battery's operational radius, the guns are much more vulnerable to enemy fire and inflict fewer casualties.  Mutually supporting batteries (batteries within each other's operational radius) might gain some benefit, but less than a line properly supported with infantry/cavalry.  

 

I haven't tested for a while now, so perhaps my comment are out of step with the current state of the game.

 

Hopefully this comment is useful.

I think this is what's been happening to me. Ever since the latest patch my Union infantry has been useless, and my artillery overpowered. If this game is to be an accurate reflection of the war then the artillery needs to be nerfed and the Union infantry needs to be as effective as the Confederate. Basically like the previous version, which i think was much better. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I feel like the damage modifiers are really unbalanced in this update. I've watched the Iron Brigade, on high ground, with cover (Oak Ridge) lose volley after volley against Davis's Brigade, which is totally exposed on low ground. Its gotten to the point where the only way I can win is using canister fire, as my brigades cannot fight the Confederates under any conditions, 

I never had this problem before, but I after the 1.55 update I really feel like the game is almost unplayable. No matter what the conditions, no matter what the brigade strength, in a shoot out battle the Union always loses now. Am I the only one this is happening to?

Mercanto.,, So if I understand you correctly the AI(ANV) is over Powered?

Let me know the Map//Setting, you used for your Fight.....

I want to play this out with both sides n take ScrnShots of the Battle, with reports.

The brigade on the higher Ground with cover usually are the winners in a Gun fight weather AI or Player,,from what I seen/played

given the Brigade rating */**/***...... n Numbers involved.

 

If I give up the higher ground(AoP) it is usually I am also getting Hammered with Artillery, while in a Gun Fight...But than again that's me

n there are a lot of different circumstances with this(Settings/Maps)

 

I always play Determined against the AI,,so the AI's(ANV) Offensive/Defensive strength is tough,,,

which I like..sometimes I can win, Usually it's a Draw/Defeat on bigger maps where the AI is Defending with good Arty support...

But what I like could be skewed....towards being unbalanced with damage modifiers as you alluded to....

Did A Battle with both sides                                              Arriving At Gettysburg

ANV // AoP // Determined

Now with different settings the game allots different strengths / weakness for the Player/AI I believe.....

So this is why I play with Determined Only.

-But this is my take only...Also my views on Arty is a few Posts above...

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Mercanto.,, So if I understand you correctly the AI(ANV) is over Powered?

Let me know the Map//Setting, you used for your Fight.....

I want to play this out with both sides n take ScrnShots of the Battle, with reports.

The brigade on the higher Ground with cover usually are the winners in a Gun fight weather AI or Player,,from what I seen/played

given the Brigade rating */**/***...... n Numbers involved.

 

If I give up the higher ground(AoP) it is usually I am also getting Hammered with Artillery, while in a Gun Fight...But than again that's me

n there are a lot of different circumstances with this(Settings/Maps)

 

I always play Determined against the AI,,so the AI's(ANV) Offensive/Defensive strength is tough,,,

which I like..sometimes I can win, Usually it's a Draw/Defeat on bigger maps where the AI is Defending with good Arty support...

But what I like could be skewed....towards being unbalanced with damage modifiers as you alluded to....

Did A Battle with both sides                                              Arriving At Gettysburg

ANV // AoP // Determined

Now with different settings the game allots different strengths / weakness for the Player/AI I believe.....

So this is why I play with Determined Only.

-But this is my take only...Also my views on Arty is a few Posts above...

AoP-                            http://imgur.com/a/gp0g5

ANV-                             http://imgur.com/a/ZSpaD

Hey Pvt. Waitkens

I always play against the AVN at the Determined difficulty level. I'll try to get some screen caps but my pc skills are terrible at best lol :P

I usually place my brigades at the military crest of Oak Ridge and Seminary Ridge, with the artillery directly behind or astride them. The artillery has been intensely powerful (to powerful in face) but the infantry has been taking extreme damage. Like I said before, I've watched the Iron Brigade or Cutler's brigade take twice as much damage in a volley, while on high ground and behind cover, then there opposing, exposed opponents. 

Before thee patch, the units which inflicted the most damage were my brigades (usually Iron brigade). And on average my brigades suffered about 50% less casualties then inflicted. Now, using the same tactics, my infantry tends to suffer more casualties then inflicted, and the artillery inflicts the lion's share of the casualties on the enemy. The only thing that hasn't changed is overall casualties, which are still 2:1 in my favour, though now due more to artillery then infantry.

I will try to get some screen caps if I can. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Mercanto.,, So if I understand you correctly the AI(ANV) is over Powered?

Let me know the Map//Setting, you used for your Fight.....

I want to play this out with both sides n take ScrnShots of the Battle, with reports.

The brigade on the higher Ground with cover usually are the winners in a Gun fight weather AI or Player,,from what I seen/played

given the Brigade rating */**/***...... n Numbers involved.

 

If I give up the higher ground(AoP) it is usually I am also getting Hammered with Artillery, while in a Gun Fight...But than again that's me

n there are a lot of different circumstances with this(Settings/Maps)

 

I always play Determined against the AI,,so the AI's(ANV) Offensive/Defensive strength is tough,,,

which I like..sometimes I can win, Usually it's a Draw/Defeat on bigger maps where the AI is Defending with good Arty support...

But what I like could be skewed....towards being unbalanced with damage modifiers as you alluded to....

Did A Battle with both sides                                              Arriving At Gettysburg

ANV // AoP // Determined

Now with different settings the game allots different strengths / weakness for the Player/AI I believe.....

So this is why I play with Determined Only.

-But this is my take only...Also my views on Arty is a few Posts above...

AoP-                            http://imgur.com/a/gp0g5

ANV-                             http://imgur.com/a/ZSpaD

As an experiment, I jsut played a bit of the first day as the Union against Confederate determined. 

Cutler occupied Oak Ridge, on high ground with 78% cover. Davis attacked, between McPherson's Ridge and Oak Ridge with no cover at all. Davis inflicted 38 casualties with his volley, Cutler delivered 36. Meanwhile, Calef's artillery battery delivered a ludicrous 300 casualties, while Davis was barely in range. 

I hate to say it, but on my end I think this patch may have broken the game :/

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As an experiment, I just played a bit of the first day as the Union against Confederate determined. 

Cutler occupied Oak Ridge, on high ground with 78% cover. Davis attacked, between McPherson's Ridge and Oak Ridge with no cover at all. Davis inflicted 38 casualties with his volley, Cutler delivered 36. Meanwhile, Calef's artillery battery delivered a ludicrous 300 casualties, while Davis was barely in range. 

I hate to say it, but on my end I think this patch may have broken the game :/

 

Well Mr. Mercanto, I agree with your Feedback/Assessment with the above post.

The Artillery being to powerful with Shot at Range /// With Cutler in cover, + an added Advantage stationed on Higher Ground.

 

-Cover is a double edged sword.

-Now with the effectiveness of cover, and how I understand it n should mirror a fire fight just like IRL...

This will effect the Soldiers 'Line Of Sight', with incoming, and outgoing Musket Fire.

Cutler is in heavy cover 78%, This will limit his LOS to Davis.

-Thereby his effective fire(Cutler) is limited with not being able to have a direct fire into/at Davis.

-The enemy 'Davis' also has decreased LOS to Cutler(Lower n in the open, an added disadvantage),

giving a diminished effective fire at/into Cutler.

 

- Now With Cutler having the Higher Ground, in good 'cover his Brigade will have an advantage in Kills/Hits.

-As Distance increases from Hill,(Higher Ground) LOS will increase for Cutler.

 Whereas Davis will have a Decrease in his hit/kill rate in rounds fired...imo

 

-With No Screen Shot to give a more accurate relative assessment, (i.e Strength/Placement-Distance to Combatants.) 

Throwing guesstimate numbers in the air, I would say in that situation Cutler should of had

the advantage in kills... ~(2 - 1)...Cutler 36 Kills // Davis ~15-18 kills......

.................

But with a game...n trying to mirror what happen's in a Real Life Battles can be a challenge, n next to impossible in certain situations....

I will add this is a Great Game....regardless...

....................

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have been playing several campaigns over the past few days and I have to say there are some pretty glaring faults I take issue with.

 

Skirmishers are essentially a useless feature. There is nothing a 400-man skirmisher detachment can do that a 400-man half-brigade couldn't do just as well, if not better. Their base morale is so low they require constant micro just to ensure they are still doing what you last ordered them to do. Their morale wavers upon simply making contact with the enemy. This is especially problematic if they are holding high ground, as their nervousness and tendency to slowly fall back while they are constantly on the verge of routing, means that they often retreat to the reverse slope of said hill without orders, allowing enemy infantry to simply walk up and take the position. You'd think skirmishers would be lethal holding high ground with cover. This is not the case in the slightest. After the first few volleys skirmishers are really more trouble than they're worth.

 

While not as bad as the skirmishers specifically, Union morale in general is abysmal. I agree that the average Rebel probably had higher morale than his Federal counterpart but right now the disparity is simply extreme... Just last battle I was defending Round Top against an attack by a mere three Rebel brigades. I had a 1500-man brigade, 2 sharpshooters, and a battery on Round Top defending. Keep in mind Round Top is a very tall hill with very heavy cover. The Rebels attacked frontally without cover, artillery support, and from low ground. The first few volleys and my Sharpshooters were already routing. One of my sharpshooter units hadn't even taken a casualty yet; but they gave up their positions almost immediately. One of the Rebel brigades then fixed bayonets and charged uphill to rout the remaining defending brigade, which was accomplished as soon as the rebels made it to the top of the hill. Within a minute of this "attack" and Round Top was taken. This same task would be, at best, extremely difficult for the Union side.

 

This game is amazing. The AI is extremely competent, hands down the best of any strategy game out there. The only thing comparable is DarthMod AI =P but the experience and immersion really suffers when you know you are fighting Confederate Ubermenschen.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well Mr. Mercanto, I agree with your Feedback/Assessment with the above post.

The Artillery being to powerful with Shot at Range /// With Cutler in cover, + an added Advantage stationed on Higher Ground.

 

-Cover is a double edged sword.

-Now with the effectiveness of cover, and how I understand it n should mirror a fire fight just like IRL...

This will effect the Soldiers 'Line Of Sight', with incoming, and outgoing Musket Fire.

Cutler is in heavy cover 78%, This will limit his LOS to Davis.

-Thereby his effective fire(Cutler) is limited with not being able to have a direct fire into/at Davis.

-The enemy 'Davis' also has decreased LOS to Cutler(Lower n in the open, an added disadvantage),

giving a diminished effective fire at/into Cutler.

 

- Now With Cutler having the Higher Ground, in good 'cover his Brigade will have an advantage in Kills/Hits.

-As Distance increases from Hill,(Higher Ground) LOS will increase for Cutler.

 Whereas Davis will have a Decrease in his hit/kill rate in rounds fired...imo

 

-With No Screen Shot to give a more accurate relative assessment, (i.e Strength/Placement-Distance to Combatants.) 

Throwing guesstimate numbers in the air, I would say in that situation Cutler should of had

the advantage in kills... ~(2 - 1)...Cutler 36 Kills // Davis ~15-18 kills......

.................

But with a game...n trying to mirror what happen's in a Real Life Battles can be a challenge, n next to impossible in certain situations....

I will add this is a Great Game....regardless...

....................

I agree with your assessment entirely. My only issue was that Cutler shouldn't have taken more casualties then Davis. 

Sorry about the lack of screenshots, if I can figure out how to make them on this pc, I will post some. :P

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have been playing several campaigns over the past few days and I have to say there are some pretty glaring faults I take issue with.

 

Skirmishers are essentially a useless feature. There is nothing a 400-man skirmisher detachment can do that a 400-man half-brigade couldn't do just as well, if not better. Their base morale is so low they require constant micro just to ensure they are still doing what you last ordered them to do. Their morale wavers upon simply making contact with the enemy. This is especially problematic if they are holding high ground, as their nervousness and tendency to slowly fall back while they are constantly on the verge of routing, means that they often retreat to the reverse slope of said hill without orders, allowing enemy infantry to simply walk up and take the position. You'd think skirmishers would be lethal holding high ground with cover. This is not the case in the slightest. After the first few volleys skirmishers are really more trouble than they're worth.

 

While not as bad as the skirmishers specifically, Union morale in general is abysmal. I agree that the average Rebel probably had higher morale than his Federal counterpart but right now the disparity is simply extreme... Just last battle I was defending Round Top against an attack by a mere three Rebel brigades. I had a 1500-man brigade, 2 sharpshooters, and a battery on Round Top defending. Keep in mind Round Top is a very tall hill with very heavy cover. The Rebels attacked frontally without cover, artillery support, and from low ground. The first few volleys and my Sharpshooters were already routing. One of my sharpshooter units hadn't even taken a casualty yet; but they gave up their positions almost immediately. One of the Rebel brigades then fixed bayonets and charged uphill to rout the remaining defending brigade, which was accomplished as soon as the rebels made it to the top of the hill. Within a minute of this "attack" and Round Top was taken. This same task would be, at best, extremely difficult for the Union side.

 

This game is amazing. The AI is extremely competent, hands down the best of any strategy game out there. The only thing comparable is DarthMod AI =P but the experience and immersion really suffers when you know you are fighting Confederate Ubermenschen.

Yeah up until this recent patch I actually thought it was really well balanced. After this last patch though it almost seems criminal to put Union infantry at the front. Its like the Federals have lined their coats with magnets lol :P. I hope they rebalance it. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

To be fair though I have to praise basically everything else about the game. LoS mechanics are great, makes having eyes on high ground important, as well as gun placement... I also haven't played in awhile, and noticed artillery limber up and deploy, which is awesome, and are much less buggy in general than before. I noticed artillery in general is much more lethal than before, which also feels realistic, but I'm not an ACW expert. Cover is very effective, taking a rifled musket volley in the open always makes you cringe, which feels realistic. The main annoyance is that as the Federals it feels like you are using militia units at times.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...